[EM] Re: Stabilizing the electoral college (was Re: electoral college)

[Steve Eppley]

Rob B wrote:
> Steve Eppley <seppley <at> alumni.caltech.edu> writes:
>> Rob B asked:
>>> Steve Eppley writes:
>>> But recounts could still be important, you've just 
>>> moved the line....what if it was a difference 
>>> 0.49999% and the election hung on whether it 
>>> was possibly really 0.5%?
>> 
>> I'm afraid I don't yet understand Rob's question.  
-snip- 
> I think you are missing my point.
> 
> You say that it is currently unstable, in that a small 
> change in votes can cause a large change in electoral
> votes.
> 
> The same thing can happen in your system, since you need 
> to have a cutoff point which determines whether it is
> "close to 50-50" or not.  A small change in votes could
> change it from being not close to 50-50 to being close 
> to 50-50.  That would result in a large change in
> electoral votes, because it suddenly tabulates things
> differently.

No, it would become a small change.  Let me repeat my
new diagram from my most recent message:

5                               -------------------
                               |
4                            --
                            |
3                         --
                         |
2                      --
                      |
1                   --
                   |
0 -----------+-----+     +     +      +
            48%   49%   50%   51%    52%

A swing of 1/2% of this state's votes, due to a recount
or due to a candidate campaigning extra hard there
just before the election, would change at most 1 
Electoral College delegate.

> Regardless, I don't think the main problem with the 
> electoral college is its instability, but the fact 
> that it weighs the votes of those in divided states 
> more than those in less divided states, which is
> inherently unfair. 

Something that's unfair to individual voters may
nevertheless be better for society as a whole,
in this case by giving candidates an incentive
to take compromise positions on the issues in 
order to successfully win swing votes in the close 
states.  At least, that's one of the arguments 
Judith Best made in her book.  But I'd prefer 
to restrict this message thread to the issue 
of stability.  A discussion of the EC's merits 
can be moved to a different thread.

--Steve